10 Commandments judge gets the boot!

[loj68]

The wacko judge in Alabama who thought separation of church and state didn't apply to him has been removed from his judicial post. Good riddance.......justice has been served. [comments edited by pdhaudio]
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/11/13/moore.tencommandments/index.html

 

[Mad Ryan]

Wow... everybody rejoyce! the system beat down somebody who actually had the balls to stand up for his beliefs. Never mind that all western law is based on the 10 commandments/judao-christian ideals... Mustn't pay homage to our roots...

 

[Matthew]

Wow... everybody rejoyce! the system beat down somebody who actually had the balls to stand up for his beliefs. Never mind that all western law is based on the 10 commandments/judao-christian ideals... Mustn't pay homage to our roots...

the point is, he is a public figure. he needs to be impartial in every respect. notice that lady liberty outside of the supreme court has a blindold on, right? he needs to be the epitome of that statue. everyone has their own beliefs, but someone in that position cant force his beliefs on someone else. just like im not legally allowed by the UCMJ to attend ANY rallys, political events, etc in uniform or anything signifying my connection to the army.

 

[Micah]

wait, so you could attend, as long as you were in plain clothes? If someone took a picture of you - and the Armed Forces people saw it - would they have a problem with it?

 

[Captain KRM P5]

I believe in the separation of church and state. Its one of the core and founding precepts to American democracy. But Mad Ryan is right; this judge fought, and rationally and nonviolently so, through the legal means of the system to defend something that he believed in. He put his credibility and his career on the line, knowing full well in some part of his mind that he would lose. He was, in effect, a champion for the right to protest, the right of free speech.

How long is it until "In God We Trust" vanishes from money? The pledge of allegiance has already been "corrected" from the vanguard of political correctness. High schools named after our founding fathers are being changed because they were once slaveholders. The politically correct movement has become the weapon of war for all those who nitpick, all those who would revise history by changing the present.

And tell me, what is so wrong about a tablet that tells you not to steal, not to cheat on your wife, not to kill and not to harbor ill will against your neighbor? Is is the mere prescence of the word "God" that gets the PC people into a frenzy!?

We are a nation where church and state are fundamentally separate. I am not a fervently relgious man, but can we deny that our roots lay in Judeo-Christian ideology? No, we cannot. But the law was followed and this judge was disciplined.

Just because the court has upheld one facet of the Constitution should not mean that it should squash another man's basic rights to peacably protest and speak up. The moment we do this we are one step further from democracy and one step closer to fascism.

 

[Matthew]

i could attend in plain clothes because they cant take away my rights, though im sure it would be discouraged. no one would get pissed if they saw a picture of me because i would be within my rights, however, i would not supposed to be discussing my job while there. so essentially people really shouldnt know im in the army while im there (it may be obvious but i shouldnt be advertising it)

 

[Mad Ryan]

My real problem with this is that on one side you have a judge that's a decorated combat Veteran who stands up for his beliefs, and on the other side you have the same slimy cocksuckers that want to make sure that convicted child molesters can quietly move into your neighborhood without anyone knowing about it.

Why is it that you can't have any reference to god in a school or government building but you can have a devil as a public school mascot? WTF?

Also, there is no such thing as "separation of church and state", PERIOD. We have what's called the anti-establishment clause which basically states that congress shall not establish one religion. All this means is that the government can't have an "official" religion. Over the last 3 decades or so this has been twisted around by some to mean what we are seeing now.

What really pisses me off (And I'm not a particularly devout person) is that some scumbag can go to a publicly funded library and view porn on publicly bought computers and yet we can't have a representation of the 10 commandments on display in a courthouse.

 

[therizzzo]

We have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. This decision comes from the PC nazis who spend their time taking down crosses and Star of David's from war memorials, taking down nativity scenes at christmas, removing the words "Merry Christmas" from school bulletin boards, defending NAMBLA and other deviants, and rewriting their own perverted version of history. Is this who you want defending your civil liberties? The ACLU ideal of the norm is what's socially acceptable at LA and Manhatten cocktail parties. Their not out to protect civil liberties, their out to take them away from people who don't dwell in ivory towers and fit the social ideal of the fringe left. They think their so smart and know what's best for us. They destroy a man who stands up for what he(and millions of others) really believes. He may be the last one who ever will. America hates you ACLU. Why don't you dry up and blow away, the world is better without you.

Reading assignment: "1984" - George Orwell.

ACLU = Thought Police

I challenge anyone to find ANY reference to "seperation of church and state" in the Constituion. The 1st amendment does not refer to any seperation, so don't even try that one. It isn't there, but good luck finding it.

 

[loj68]

Wow... everybody rejoyce! the system beat down somebody who actually had the balls to stand up for his beliefs. Never mind that all western law is based on the 10 commandments/judao-christian ideals... Mustn't pay homage to our roots...

ummmmmm.....no......he was a judge and refused to obey the law he was sworn to uphold.

And no, western law is not based on the 10 commandments.....not even close. Last I checked our law wasn't based around "honoring thy mother and father", "not worshipping false idols", and "keeping the sabbath sacred". This is a common misconception that is spouted quite frequently without even a thought as to how ridiculous it is. Any of our laws that may appear to have a reference to the commandments (theft for instance) are also common in many other civilizations where christianity has no influence.

 

[Mad Ryan]

ummmmmm.....no......he was a judge and refused to obey the law he was sworn to uphold.

And no, western law is not based on the 10 commandments.....not even close. Last I checked our law wasn't based around "honoring thy mother and father", "not worshipping false idols", and "keeping the sabbath sacred". This is a common misconception that is spouted quite frequently without even a thought as to how ridiculous it is. Any of our laws that may appear to have a reference to the commandments (theft for instance) are also common in many other civilizations where christianity has no influence.

Our law system is based on English common law which came about from the codification of church law. Do your research.

 

[loj68]

this judge fought, and rationally and nonviolently so, through the legal means of the system to defend something that he believed in. He put his credibility and his career on the line, knowing full well in some part of his mind that he would lose. He was, in effect, a champion for the right to protest, the right of free speech.

He is not a hero....he did NOT uphold his sworn duties as a judge and he disobeyed the rulings of higher courts. He is a disgrace to our system of democracy. There are methods to fight and protest legally and he thought he was above that.....and he was wrong.

How long is it until "In God We Trust" vanishes from money? The pledge of allegiance has already been "corrected" from the vanguard of political correctness.

I think you've got this backwards. U.S. currency did not originally have "in god we trust" on it.....nor did our pledge originally have "one nation under god" in it. Both of these were added many years after the founding of our country (as recently as the 1950's). The real question is when will the revisionism of the religious wacko's allow us to restor our national motto, currency, and pledge back to the secular versions that our forefathers created.

And tell me, what is so wrong about a tablet that tells you not to steal, not to cheat on your wife, not to kill and not to harbor ill will against your neighbor? Is is the mere prescence of the word "God" that gets the PC people into a frenzy!?

We are a nation where church and state are fundamentally separate. I am not a fervently relgious man, but can we deny that our roots lay in Judeo-Christian ideology? No, we cannot. But the law was followed and this judge was disciplined.

Just because the court has upheld one facet of the Constitution should not mean that it should squash another man's basic rights to peacably protest and speak up. The moment we do this we are one step further from democracy and one step closer to fascism.

Our founding fathers were christian but our nation was in no way founded in judeo christian ideology. Our Constitution specifically addresses that point and clearly shows that we are a secular nation that shall take no stand for or against a particular religion...........so, having gigantic representations of a particular religion in our courts is a clear violation of this mandate.

 

[Mad Ryan]

Furthermore...

As more laws were codified, cases were recorded so that magistrates could hear cases and decide them based on precidence rather than the local lord or the King. The nobility in England had declared their independence from the catholic church but had maintained many of the same laws that had been in place regarding spiritual matters. The King became the spiritual head as well as secular leader and one set of laws became "common law".

 

[REMillers]

loj68 is correct on the statement that as a judge he can not have personal influence decide his cases. By delaying the hearings cause of how he "felt personally" he was not following his oath. It is that simple.

Now you are right that he did stand up for what he believe, but that action was wrong and his termination is warrented.

 

[Mad Ryan]

I agree that the judge over stepped his authority and should have been punished, but he isn't a "whacko" for standing up for his beliefs in a non-violent way.

 

[loj68]

I challenge anyone to find ANY reference to "seperation of church and state" in the Constituion. The 1st amendment does not refer to any seperation, so don't even try that one. It isn't there, but good luck finding it.

How about this quote by Thomas Jefferson......you may also know him as the guy who WROTE the constitution......so it goes without saying that his clarification of the subject should be valid.

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State. " - Thomas Jefferson 1802

 

[REMillers]

No not really a wacko in that he stood up for his beliefs, just stating it down on two levels.
Just wanted to post it that way so hopefully people can see both sides to what I already discussed on another board concerning this topic.

 

[Cirielle]

And this kids is what living in the Bible Belt does to you!

Sorry first thing that came to mind as I read this!!!
Seriously though, I can see why some would have a problem with this. And I can see why others wouldn't.
Pretty much, I just don't care right now....
Not understanding this....read my sig!

 

[loj68]

Our law system is based on English common law which came about from the codification of church law. Do your research.

I actually research this all the time.....quite a hobby of mine......and you're wrong. Judeo christian ideals are based in religion.......our law and founding doctrines are wholly secular down to the last letter. There isn't anything in our constitution that cannot also be found in countless other socieities and cultures who are NOT judeo-christian. This is a fact.

 

[Mad Ryan]

What this really comes down to is a battle between the people who believe in right and wrong (regardless of your chosen faith) and the people who are moral relativists.

The latter believe that all cultures/views have equal validity which in a perfect/utopian world may be true, is in reality total BS. I'm well acquainted with moral relativism, as I've been attending a university for the last 5 years. It's total horseshit. I feel I'm qualified to make this statement because unlike most of the freshmen that tout the liberal lines their prof's put in their heads, I have lived all over the world and have sampled other cultures. Our culture, while not perfect, is light years ahead of most of the rest of the world in terms of the way we treat each other.

 

[loj68]

I agree that the judge over stepped his authority and should have been punished, but he isn't a "whacko" for standing up for his beliefs in a non-violent way.

I'm saying he's a wacko because of his illegal actions.....and also I think he's a wacko because he constantly insists that he did his duty as a judge by "acknowledging god" which he keeps insisting is mandated by our constitution. His mental status appears pretty suspect to me.